"40K Horus Heresy Books....any good?" Topic

How are the 40k novels that cover the Horus Heresy?

And, are there any that cover the Salamanders or the Emperors Children in this period?

Cheers.

If you enjoy the background, they are quite readable – some better than others, depending on the author. I don't think there's a Salamanders book but the Emperor's Children are pretty well covered in Fulgrim, though they crop up elsewhere as well…

There is a fairly recent Salamanders book but I don't know if it's in the Heresy series.

I thought the first couple of books in the HH series were very good. I only read the first 2 or 3, though.

I've read "Horus Rising", "Galaxy in Flames", "Fulgrim", "Legion" and "Flight of the Eisenstein". I didn't like Legion very much but the others were OK. Fulgrim covers the fall of the Emperor's Children. I can recommend the others as solid, quick reads.

They're not too bad. I hated the Dark Angels book, since it's really just a fantasy book with a chapter or two of 40K thrown in towards the end.

I like them.

There not too bad if you like the 40K background. I've gotten through Horus Rising – Mechanicum. Decent of Angels is a book you have to trudge through and is pretty much a whole book of set up for Fallen Angles. Fulgrum covers the Emperors Children. I can't remember which book the Salamanders make an appearance in but it was more about them getting chewed up since they didn't know the unit in the second wave / cordon behind them was a traitor chapter. How good or bad the books are depends on who wrote them. Also it depends on how much you like cannon. GW doesn't like cannon and these books do undo chunks of what they stated before, and cannot be excused as "different viewpoint" differences. It boils down to my first sentence.

I am looking forward to a Thousand Sons book since they are the only traitor group I care for.

And at the end of the book (Fulgrum) you do get a little sympathetic to Fulgrums end state.

I own and enjoy the entire series (to date)…some are better than others (the first three "trilogy" is the best), but I have no complaints about the others and I HONESTLY don't know why so many have problems re: Descent of Angels, it was one of the better ones, IMHO.

In short…snag them!

I have them all too, to date. I think Descent of Angels was OK, not superlative. I think if you're a Dark Angels fanboy, it would be more appealiing.

I also disagree; I thought Legion was brilliant!

Damon.

I've read all of them and they vary greatly from ok to very good. I didn't much care for Fulgrim. I thought Flight of the Eisenstien was the best so far. The first 4 books can be a little repetative since they cover the same events from the views of different chapters. I agree with the above that Descent of Angels was really just a long setup to Fallen Angels.

Overall if you are into 40k background stuff you will mostly enjoy them.

Most are pretty good if you're into the 40k background. They are however, milking it for all it's worth and moving the plot forward at a snail's pace, if at all, with each new book.

I agree with A.P., the 1st Dark Angels book was decent, but it needs to be immediatly followed by reading the 2nd DA book to be really good. And with at least 18 SM legions, all potentially having their own POV and stories of the same time period, it's easy for a series with multiple authors to fall into the "slow, & same event/different POV" trap. I'm waiting for some Space Wolf goodness, myself… Maybe the DA/SW feud's beginnings… And anyways, anyone familiar with the 40K background already knows how it all turns out, why not milk it for all it's worth, story-wise?

I've enjoyed them so far. I agree that that the two Dark Angels books were the weakest.

Probably the first four are the best, really quite tragic.

I think they generally conform to the existing canon. Yeah, some details here and there are different, but the overall framework is remarkably consistent with how the rise of the Imperium and the Horus Heresy were described in the rulebooks, going all the way back to the original Adeptus Titanicus.

The biggest difference is in the first three. It's NOT the dark future. The stories start out as a renaissance of Man, bringing the light of Science to a benighted galaxy, and only later take on the characteristic 'grim darkness of the far future'.

I really like the first three novels. I wasn't as pleased with Flight of the Eisenstein, but that's due to them changing a detail from the way-backs of Adeptus Titanicus.

Very cool reviews guys. Thnx.

2 final questions. Has the total series ever been released in one combined printing?

Also, can anyone list the chronological order of the novels for me? Its a little hard to discern.

Cheers again for the info.

To answer the above, is this correct:

1. Horus Rising
2. False Gods
3. Galaxy in Flames
4. Flight of the Eisenstein
5. Fulgrim
6. Descent of Angels
7: Fallen Angeles
8: Legion

?

From wiki…

Horus Rising – Dan Abnett – April 2006
False Gods – Graham McNeill – June 2006
Galaxy in Flames – Ben Counter – Oct 2006
The Flight of the Eisenstein – James Swallow – March 2007
Fulgrim – Graham McNeill – July 2007
Descent of Angels – Mitchel Scanlon – October 2007
Legion – Dan Abnett – March 2008
Battle for the Abyss – Ben Counter – August 2008
Mechanicum – Graham McNeill – December 2008
Tales of Heresy – Kyme & Priestley – April 2009[2]
Fallen Angels – Mike Lee – July 2009[3]
Raven's Flight – Gav Thorpe – February 2010 (Audio Book Only)
A Thousand Sons – Graham McNeill – March 2010
Prospero Burns – Dan Abnett – April 2010[4]
Nemesis – James Swallow – August 2010

And to answer your other question; not yet, since the series is unfinished. I'm sure they will be collected into omnibus editions at some point.

Thanks WulF!

One should also consider that the current fluff is written from a 10,000+ year later, post-revisionist, anti-non-Imperial point of view. Even without the "victors write the histories" attitude, details are lost, or changed to fit someones agenda, even in real life! Don't belive me? Read many older R.W. history books. The apparent changes to the 40K history often mirrors the real world in how it works, and 10,000+ years of religious worship of a person who never claimed to be a god, added to the belief that all machines have a spirit, would of course lead to a religon-induced dark age… Curious that the most tech-enlightened period of 40K universe history is considered, by them, a dark age, huh?

They are ok, best when focusing on individuals, in terms of capturing a vast war that goes on to conquer a million world they are absolutely awful, for that pick up a book on Stalingrad, Kursk, the Chinese civil war etc, far bigger scale and bizarrely often more troops involved.

I liked em, but agree about moving things forward.

They can read as a personal overview, kind of like an "Eyewitness to history" or "I was there" kind of thing.

I too am looking forward to the Thousand Sons ones as that's my thing (well, variant anyway…Enjoyed Dark Angels, as my son has them)

I also have, and like, the 4 volume "Visions…" books about the Horus Heresy, with the card art….I am using some pre-heresy 100 sons for my variant army.

Bell of Lost Souls has "Warhammer 30K", btw, rules for gaming the Heresy.

I was never much of a fan of the Warhammer 40k books until I started in on the Horus Heresy series. I consider them quite above the standard 40k book for various reasons. I also consider some of them to be really good as sci-fi in general.

Book 1 – Excellent
Book 2 – Very good
Book 3 – Good
Book 4 – Hugely tedious for 180 pages until it starts to move the story forward.
Book 5 – Ok

And that was where I stopped buying them as they were declining in quality rather drastically and I just couldn't face reading about certain events from every single persons point of view in a novel by novel basis.

Okay, just finished the first two.

I give "Horus Rising" (Dan Abnett) an "A-", and
"False Gods" (Graham McNeill) and "A+". I thought McNeill really complimented the first book well and moved the story ahead seamlessly. Looking forward to the next two books!

Galaxy in Flames, "A" (so far, so good!).

Eisinstein: A-
Fulgrim: B+

"Descent of Angels"…. which after reading, one could almost re-title, "Descent of a Series."

What a tough one to grade. Its like having 2 books in one. Unfortunately, the bad book ( the first 3/4) is much bigger than the good one!

He does redeem himself well with the final chapters of the book, but what a long read to get there!

Overall….

Descent of Angels = C+

Sped through "Legion". VERY pleased. A fun read from start to finish. Like a modern spy novel.

A+

I agree about the sense of scale in all of the 40K novels I've read (not too many, I admit). The writers just don't seem to grasp how huge a military force would have to be to conquer a city, let alone a world, against any kind of determined resistance. I don't expect 200 pages explaining the logistics involved, just adding a zero or two to some of their troop figures would make me happy. At the minute any mention of the pitifully small numbers of troops immediately pulls me out of the story.
Having said that, the first four HH books were pretty good but I only got half way through five. I might pick it up again at a future date.

I totally agree with you about the scale dilema A.B. Thats always been a small bone Ive had to pick with 40k fluff.

Ive noticed reading the first few Heresy novels that no Legion is mentioned to ever contain about more than 10,000 troops which often makes me wonder what the rest of the legion is up to (or where its up to?).

Back to reviews:

"Battle for the Abyss" has some minor problems with being a bit predictable and repetative at times, but aside from that its a good read. It features some of the best small unit action to date in the Horuse Heresy books. It made me want to field some 30K period World Eaters so it must have done something right!

B+ read overall.

Mid-way through Mechanicum at the moment and its VERY slow going. Slowest read since "Descent". I'm hoping the second half will take off.

"Mechanicum"….sigh. (*Minor spoiler alert*)

What with Titans, Knights, Ad Mech Protectors, Skitarii, and a malignant chaos spawned computer virus…this should have been a great book.

Alas, this one takes FAR to long to get to the real gritty action. In fact, the best action in the book is in the last 20 pages. If this portion of the book had been in the first 100 pages, it could have been a a great one.

Instead, the first 3/4 of the book follow a single character and a plot line that by the end seem totally unnecessary and more like wasted space.

Even the (somewhat) surprising arrival of 4 companies of marines at a particular point in the story cant help this one. Too much pulp and not enough action in this one. Too bad.

"Mechanicum" = "C"

"Raven's Flight", the first go at a "book on cd". Mixed results here. Nice to hear space marine voices, even if they sound like an inner-London city gang. Good story, but to short on battles, and too short all together in my opinion. I hope they will stick to the pulp in the future, or, make the cd's longer (this one comes in at 65 minutes).
Overall, a "B" rating.

"Tales of Hersey" is another mixed bag. Several short stories by different authors instead 1 storyline. 2 of the tales are good, 1 is poor, and the rest fall in between somewhere. Overall, it felt a bit like filler until they could get their next full length novel out. GW needs to be careful not to bore or burn out readers by drawing this series out too long. Overall, another "B" rating.

Ive started "Fallen Angels" and sadly, the first hundred pages are dragging. I'm hoping this one picks up soon or it will be another long read. I also received "1000 Sons" and can't help but start reading this one a little early.

Interestingly enough, another title in the series has popped up on Amazon for pre-order, though Ive heard nothing else about it so far:
link

Wow, that is the first time I've ever heard someone complain that 40k fiction did not have enough 0s when referring to people/troops/etc.

My biggest complaint with 40k fiction as a rule is that whenever numbers are involved they are mind-boggling. I disagree that you would need 10 billion soldiers to do this, that, or the other.

I mean, look how few troops have been involved in historical accounts when modern technology (era-dependent) has clashed with low tech stuff.

eg:
-Cortez takes on Montezuma
-US Cavalry takes on Native Americans
-British colonies around the world through the ages
-Boxer Rebellion
-Japanese destruction of Samurai
-many battles across the world where guns showed up in good enough quality/quantity to make a difference

Generally either these battles show us that the only way the low tech folks win is either through amazing difference in numbers or to deal with terrible leaders who manage to overcome their technology advantage.